Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) young adults (YA) experience disparities in nicotine and tobacco use. Mass-reach health communications can prevent nicotine and tobacco initiation and progression, but LGBTQ+adults report low engagement. Although cultural targeting (CT) could reach LGBTQ+YA, we know little about the strategies that resonate with this population. We probed how LGBTQ+YA perceived CT content to inform tobacco public education campaigns on strategies to engage this population.
Methods We conducted six focus groups with N=20 LGBTQ+YA (18–35) who had ever used vapes, cigarettes or both. We showed participants examples of CT tobacco public education campaigns, probed their opinions and perceptions and coded transcripts using a data-driven inductive approach.
Results Participants were more inclined to view an ad as effective when they felt it was authentically created for the LGBTQ+community. Avoiding stereotyping, including diversity, using ‘subtle’ LGBTQ+iconography (ie, rainbows), and including personal experiences all contributed to the authenticity of the ad. Participants discussed the importance of visual appeal; bright colours made ads appear too corporate or like an ad for a tobacco product. Lastly, participants responded well to gain-framed messages rather than traditional risk messaging.
Conclusion Tobacco public education ads featuring ‘every-day’ LGBTQ+people in candid or unposed shots, personal stories with gain-framed messaging, and subtle Pride iconography and colours may increase acceptability among LGBTQ+YA. Researchers should focus on cultivating authenticity in ads and avoid outdated trends by consulting with the community and moving with speed from development to implementation.
- Nicotine
- Advertising and Promotion
- Priority/special populations
- Media
Data availability statement
Data are available on reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available on reasonable request.
Footnotes
X @joanne_gp
Contributors ACE: writing—original draft, guarantor, JGP: conceptualisation, investigation, methodology, writing—reviewing and editing, supervision, AM: formal analysis, writing—reviewing and editing, EJ: formal analysis, writing—reviewing and editing, CM: formal analysis; HC: writing—reviewing and editing; EE: writing—reviewing and editing; SG: writing—reviewing and editing; GT: formal analysis; MS: writing—reviewing and editing.
Funding Research reported in this publication was funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products under Award Number K99CA260718 and R00CA260718 (PI: JGP). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the FDA. Research reported in this publication was supported by The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center and the OSU College of Public Health.
Disclaimer The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Competing interests No, there are no competing interests.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.